Job Opportunity as Deputy Director of the Administrative Trials Unit, NYC DOE 3020-a Hearings

My opinion of the employment opportunity for Administrative Trials Unit Deputy Director:

If you are a lawyer and have issues with ethics, meaning that you do not think ethical conduct should get in the way of terminating tenured Department employees who, you have heard, lie, cheat, steal, have sex with minor children in their workplaces, and alter records as well as take money that isn't theirs, and you want to be head of a team of lawyers who violate the rule of law and rules of evidence to fire these wrong-doers, then the current job opportunity is for you!

The position at the NYC DOE assures you immunity for any mishandling of any case of misconduct where the tenured employee is not terminated, which is always somebody's fault at the ATU  or the error of the arbitrator who, of course you can fire at the end of the school year when the arbitrators' contracts are up for renewal. I'm sure that if you keep in mind that "all Respondents accused of misconduct are guilty when charged" is the prevailing policy, that you can always schedule the miscreant for a probable cause hearing where the rights to cross-examine by the Respondent's representative of any DOE witness is prohibited, and that you must make sure that your legal team spends as much time as possible altering facts and making scripts for witnesses to study and learn before they testify, you will be fine.

Go to the link and apply. Good luck. Oh - you may end up on this blog, as well!!!

This is my opinion.

See my  post about what I think about DOE Attorney Michael Francis

Michael Francis

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Deputy Director – Administrative Trials Unit

Tracking Code

12539

Job Description

Position Summary: The Deputy Director – Administrative Trials Unit serves as the representative of the Chancellor performing sophisticated legal work in disciplinary proceedings and provides support to the Deputy Counsel. The Deputy Director will be accountable for the success and performance of team members in assigned practice areas in meeting performance goals and identified objectives; will be designated as the Administrative Trials Unit Assistant Deputy Counsel; and will perform high-level legal work. Performs related work.

Reports to: Deputy Counsel, Administrative Trials Unit

Direct Reports: Administrative Trials Unit Attorneys and administrative support staff.

Key Relationships: Represents the Department of Education (DOE) in 3020-A proceedings and hearings pursuant to Section 75. Provides legal counsel and training to Community Superintendents and Principals on disciplinary procedures. Confers with subject matter experts, technical specialists, and other attorneys, including counsel for litigants. Acts as a liaison to executives within the DOE and to other City agencies.

Responsibilities

Case Management

·        Manages the case load of the Administrative Trials Unit by assigning cases to staff attorneys and monitoring the conduct of Technical Assistance Conferences (TAC), review of charging instruments and potential stipulations of settlements.

·        Reviews Office of Personnel Investigation (OPI) arrest cases to determine if there is appropriate substantiation and evidence for charges.

·        Manages monthly case reviews with office attorneys. Assumes direct responsibility for all phases of complex high profile legal cases. This includes preparing for and/or litigating complex cases involving large amounts of money, significant precedents, novel and complicated determinations of law and fact, or cases having significant legal, policy or financial implications for the DOE.

·        Determines the advisability of presenting witnesses, admissibility of types of evidence and matters of legal strategy.

·        Prepares and argues difficult cases and appeals in administrative tribunals and in the courts.

·        Reviews, revises and approves agreements prepared by other attorneys.

·        Coordinates and assists with professional development for Community Superintendents and Principals concerning the 3020-A disciplinary charges process.

Trial Strategy

·        Handles legal issues and cases including recommendations concerning the soundness of charges, preparing specification of charges, coordinating the gathering of evidence, and briefing witnesses.

·        Develops plans and objectives for the conduct of various Administrative Trials Unit functions; devises methods and procedures for the implementation of approved policies.

·        Recommends settlements pursuant to DOE administrative tribunals.

·        Leads trial issues discussions and determination of appropriate charges.

·        Administers trial calendar in conjunction with the Chief Research Attorney.

·        Manages intra-office trial seminars and Center for Law and Education (CLE) training for staff attorneys.

·        Coordinates and assists with professional development for superintendents and principals concerning the 3020-A disciplinary charges process.

·        Manages legal summary informational database for recurring case issues which will be utilized by staff attorneys to complete closing briefs and arguments.

Legal Research

·        Conducts legal investigations, holds informal hearings, and examines prospective witnesses.

·        Conducts research and prepares legal briefs and memoranda on labor and employment law issues.

·        Reviews complex, highly technical laws, rules, and regulations.

·        Serves as the chief research contact on cases and issues “first impressions,” particularly on contract interpretation as it relates to 3020-A issues.

·        Manages and maintains the "Case Decision Bank" used by staff attorneys when completing answers to motions, closing arguments, and related documentation.

·        Plays a lead role in coordinating and/or providing professional development for Community Superintendents and Principals concerning the 3020-A disciplinary charges process.

·        Manages the distribution of decisions of interest and advises staff on any changes of law and controlling authority.

Qualification Requirements:

Minimum

Admission to the New York State Bar; and four (4) years of recent full-time satisfactory, relevant legal experience subsequent to admission to any bar, eighteen months of which must have been in the supervision of other attorneys, in an administrative, managerial or executive capacity, or performing highly complex and significant legal work.

NOTE: Selected candidates must remain members of the New York State Bar in good standing for the duration of their employment.

Applicants who have a client with a legal or business matter pending against, before or with the DOE must obtain such client’s consent to apply for employment with the DOE.  If invited to interview for this position, such applicants are required to disclose the nature of such matters at the interview.  

Preferred

·        Ability to coordinate and supervise complex legal and labor relations activities.

·        Overall knowledge of the school system and ability to advise and render legal opinions on educational policies and practices.

·        Ability to initiate effective litigation strategies.

·        Excellent written and verbal communication skills.

·        Ability to interact effectively with others.

·        Highly organized and excellent problem-solving skills.

Salary: $102,788+

Please include a resume and cover letter with your application. 

Applications will be accepted until position is filled.

NOTE: The filling of all positions is subject to budget availability and/or grant funding. 

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

It is the policy of the Department of Education of the City of New York to provide educational and employment opportunities without regard to race, color, religion, creed, ethnicity, national origin, alienage, citizenship status, age, marital status, partnership status, disability, sexual orientation, gender (sex), military status, prior record of arrest or conviction (except as permitted by law), predisposing genetic characteristics, or status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual offenses and stalking, and to maintain an environment free of harassment on any of the above-noted grounds, including sexual harassment or retaliation.  Inquiries regarding compliance with this equal opportunity policy may be directed to: Office of Equal Opportunity, 65 Court Street, Room 1102, Brooklyn, New York 11201, or visit the OEO website at http://schools.nyc.gov/OEO

Job Location

NEW YORK, New York, United States

Position Type

Full-Time/Regular

New Posting

Yes

Readvertisement

No

Recanvass

N/A

District

N/A

Office of the General Counsel

• The legal office is comprised of the General Practice Unit, the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) Unit, the ISC Counsel, the Special Education Unit, the Commercial Unit, and the Ethics Officer.
• The investigative office is comprised of the Office of Special Investigations, and the Office of Equal Opportunity.
• The disciplinary office is comprised of the Administrative Trials Unit, and the Teacher Performance Unit.
• The audit office is comprised of the Office of the Auditor General.
• The labor office is comprised of the Office of Labor Relations.
• The compliance office is comprised of the Office of Compliance Services.
• The Office of Federal and State Regulatory Compliance (OFSRC) is comprised of the Administrative Legal Unit.

Investigative

The Office of the General Counsel's investigative office is comprised of the following units: 

§  The Office of Special Investigations (OSI) investigates allegations of improper and unlawful behavior, including corporal punishment and verbal abuse against students, to help ensure a safe and secure learning environment for New York City’s students, staff members, and parents. All other allegations of misconduct should be reported to the Special Commissioner of Investigation at (212) 510-1500.

§  The Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) investigates allegations of discrimination or harassment. In addition to investigating internal agency complaints, OEO advises schools on matters relating to equal employment opportunity, and provides training on acceptable workplace practices under equal opportunity employment law.

 Disciplinary

The Office of the General Counsel's disciplinary office is comprised of the following units:

§  The Administrative Trials Unit (ATU) is responsible for the prosecution of tenured teacher disciplinary cases, trainings and advice on how to discipline a tenured employee or permanent civil servant, and also to review documentation as it relates to the discipline process.

§  The Teacher Performance Unit (TPU) is a new unit comprised of experienced attorneys who will litigate incompetence cases against ineffective tenured pedagogues.

Administrative Trials Unit

The Administrative Trials Unit is responsible for the prosecution of disciplinary cases.

ATU is available for trainings and advice on how to discipline a tenured employee or permanent civil servant and also to review documentation as it relates to the discipline process. If appropriate, ATU may draft charges under Education Law, Section 3020-a or Section 75 of the Civil Service Law against the subject employee. This process entails a joint effort by the principal and/or supervisor along with the ATU attorney to litigate a case against the employee either for the purposes of progressive discipline or to seek the employee's termination. Should you seek charges, you must schedule a Technical Assistance Conference (TAC) with ATU for a complete review of the employee's personnel file and any related discussions.

From Betsy Combier:

This information is not correct. Laura Brantley is no longer the Director of the ATU, Attorney Karen Antoine is currently in that position (kantoine1@schools.nyc.gov)

According to The Green Book online, this is Laura Brantley's new number:
Office of Equal Opportunity & Diversity Management  –  Laura Brantley 
(718) 935-2427

Teacher Performance Unit

The Teacher Performance Unit (“TPU”) is a new unit comprised of experienced attorneys who will litigate incompetence cases against ineffective tenured pedagogues. TPU’s goal is to help improve teacher quality in schools by bringing and litigating these cases in a thorough, expeditious and effective manner.

In partnership with the consultants of the Labor Support Unit (“LSU”), TPU will offer high quality and responsive support to principals, and other school officials in connection with cases involving previously identified tenured teachers in need of support and remediation. This support will include, among other things, providing these ineffective tenured teachers with quality professional development.

Additionally, TPU in consultation with the principal will make a determination, on a case by case basis whether to commence the 3020-a process. Thereafter, TPU and LSU will continue to provide counsel to the principal and other school officials in connection with the preparation and litigation of 3020-a disciplinary charges.

NY City Councilman Ruben Wills is Convicted of Public Corruption, Sentencing is August 10, 2017

Well, finally Ruben Wills has been convicted. I wonder what MS226 Principal Rushell White thinks of this? And, does she have the $750 Louis Vuitton handbag?

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

City Councilman Convicted of Stealing Thousands in Public Funds

Ruben Wills is scheduled to be sentenced on Aug. 10. He faces up to seven years in prison.

Queens Councilman Ruben Wills found guilty of stealing over $30G in taxpayer money

Queens Councilman Ruben Wills was convicted Thursday of five counts against him in a corruption trial, which included charges of stealing more than $30,000 in taxpayer money.

Wills, who was accused of using the money to buy food, clothes, gas and a $750 Louis Vuitton handbag, buried his head in his hands as the jury read its verdict at the end of an 11-day trial in Queens Criminal Court.

The jury found Wills guilty of one count of a scheme to defraud, two counts of grand larceny and two counts of filing a false instrument. The jury acquitted Wills on a single charge of filing false business records.

The conviction automatically expels Wills from the council.

His bio has already been removed from the council website.

"Ruben Wills' crimes were a shameful violation of the public trust," said Attorney General Schneiderman, whose office prosecuted the case. "Ruben Wills stole taxpayer dollars to buy fancy purses and clothes for himself and his friends. New Yorkers deserved better."

Prosecutors said Wills used public matching funds from his 2009 council campaign to pay $11,500 to fund a shell company created to translate and distribute campaign literature that was never given out.

The money was instead redirected to a nonprofit corporation that Wills controlled and used to make personal purchases including the handbag, which he bought at Macy's. Wills, a former state Senate staffer, also used money to shop at Nordstrom and Home Depot, officials said.

"Ruben Wills betrayed the trust of all New Yorkers when he abused his position in the State Senate to steal thousands of dollars from the hard working taxpayers of New York for his own selfish gain," said Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito.

"Serving in elected office requires honesty and integrity and today's conviction makes clear that Ruben Wills is unfit to be a member of the City Council,"

During the trial, the black councilman and his attorney said questions from the prosecutor about a possible romance between the married Wills and his chief of staff were racially charged and out of bounds.

"It was just to muddy up Ruben to the jurors," Kevin O'Donnell told the Daily News before the verdict. "They wouldn't have done this with a white politician."

The councilman, who was elected in 2010 and indicted four years later, faces up to seven years in prison.

English Teacher Frances Meyers Loses Her Appeal To Overturn Her U-Rating

Matter of Meyers v Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y.

2017 NY Slip Op 03891 [150 AD3d 501]

May 16, 2017

Appellate Division, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

As corrected through Wednesday, June 28, 2017

[*1]

In the Matter of Frances Meyers, Appellant, v Department of Education of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

Glass Krakower LLP, New York (Bryan D. Glass of counsel), for appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for respondents.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered January 6, 2016, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denying the petition to annul the determination of respondent New York City Department of Education, dated November 5, 2014, which sustained petitioner's unsatisfactory performance rating for the 2013-2014 school year, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent's determination that petitioner's performance as a teacher of English as a second language during the 2013-2014 school year was unsatisfactory is not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Richards v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 117 AD3d 605 [1st Dept 2014]; Matter of Brennan v City of New York, 123 AD3d 607 [1st Dept 2014]). The determination is rationally supported by the principal's detailed descriptions of petitioner's difficulties in developing learning objectives, using lesson plans, maintaining academic rigor, meeting students' varying needs, facilitating "accountable talk" through "higher order thinking questions," and actively engaging students, among other things, as well as managing her classroom, and petitioner's persistent failure to improve despite the ongoing individualized professional development support she received.

Petitioner's contention that she was not provided with sufficient time or feedback to remediate perceived deficiencies is belied by the record.

We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Feinman and Gesmer, JJ.

NYC Comptroller Cites The NYC Department of Education For Not Accounting For Thousands of Missing Computers, Tablets and Laptops

I would add to the quote above: "...or for stealing public property."

If public funds have paid for 50 computers to be given to your school, who is to point the finger at you, the principal/AP if you take one home? No one. I am not saying that all principals have thought about doing this, but I am saying that there are principals who have taken public property for themselves, or others.

See Stuart Possner's case. and,

Five NYC Department of Education Former and Current DOE Network Leaders Exposed For Violating P-Card Rules

There are many more.

On Thursday July 20, 2017 City Councilman Ruben Wills was convicted of public corruption:
City Councilman Convicted of Stealing Thousands in Public Funds
I wonder how MS226 Principal Rushell White feels about that.

MS 226 Principal Rushell White Key Words: Checks From Ruben Wills

Did Rushell White get the $750 handbag made by Louis Vuitton? People I spoke to at MS 226 say yes, she did.

Or, if a member of your staff asks where a missing computer (or two or three) may be, you, as the principal can charge him/her with taking it, and if this person doesn't have tenure, he/she can be discontinued immediately following the 60-day notice; or, if this person has tenure, then it is time for a 3020-a, with other charges padding the list of Specifications to make sure the person is terminated.

So you, principal/AP/favored staff member dont have to worry about anything. Just enjoy your spanking new computer.

Parents and non-staff members are also sometimes on the take:
Stuyvesant High School Parents' Association is Cited For Financial Fraud and Discrimination

or in danger because they say something:
Booker T. Washington Middle School 54, Grievance Brings Retaliation

How many teachers have been told suddenly that they are re-assigned, and must leave the building, leaving all their stuff accumulated over many years, in their classrooms, never to be seen again. Sometimes the property of the re-assigned gets put into a room where staff can go through the items and take what they want.

If this happens, go to the police, make a complaint. Pronto. Then tell the Principal you need your stuff, and go to the UFT and tell them .

Betsy Combier
 betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Scott Stringer

New Comptroller Stringer Audit: Thousands of DOE Computers, Laptops, and Tablets Missing or Not Properly Accounted For

JULY 19, 2017

In a sample of just nine locations, DOE failed to account for almost 35 percent of machines

Over 1,800 computers, tablets, and other technology were missing from sampled schools

(New York, NY) – A new Comptroller Stringer investigation has found the New York City Department of Education is missing more than 1,800 computers, laptops, and tablets, while more than 3,500 were not properly accounted for. In a sample of just eight schools and one agency office, the Comptroller found 35 percent of approximately 14,000 machines were not properly accounted for.

The follow-up audit released today comes two and a half years after a December 2014 audit by Comptroller Stringer that highlighted how the DOE could not locate 1,817 computers and identified another nearly 400 laptops and tablets that were sitting in storage, unopened and unused.

The Comptroller’s new investigation today revealed that the DOE has made no real progress in managing its technology inventory in the years since. Auditors found:

• An additional 1,816 laptops, computers, and tablets are now missing—from just nine DOE locations audited;
• 3,541 devices that were or should have been at those nine locations were not listed in DOE’s inventory — increasing the risk that DOE equipment can be stolen undetected; and
• The DOE continues to maintain the same decentralized inventory records for its technology equipment that were found inaccurate two and a half years ago and remain so.

“I’m calling on the DOE to do a top-to-bottom review of all of its computers, laptops, and monitors. When we should be preparing our kids for the great age of technology, when coding is changing the world, the DOE is losing and misplacing its tech equipment. This isn’t just a massive mess – it’s wrong. When laptops and tablets go missing, or are stored in closets gathering dust, children and teachers are let down. The ineptitude by the bureaucracy is resulting in wasted resources, and it undermines our ability to prepare our children for the future,” New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer said. “The DOE has known about these problems since we audited this very issue over two years ago – and the agency has made no real progress in addressing them. We constantly hear the same excuses from the agency – that monitoring is in place, that systems are functioning the way they should, and that the public should trust that everything is fine. As this audit once again shows, taxpayer dollars are exposed to waste, fraud, or abuse – and it’s coming at our kids’ expense. This has to change.”

Between July 2014 and March 2016, the DOE entered into $209.9 million worth of contracts for computers, laptops, monitors, and tablets with Apple, Lenovo, and CDW Government, LLC. The items purchased through these three contracts included:

• Desktops computers that cost between $332 and $2,290;
• Laptops that cost between $167 and $2,339;
• Tablets that cost between $251 and $900; and
• Computer monitors that cost between $94 and $452.

Comptroller Stringer’s December 2014 audit found that the DOE was unable to properly manage its technology hardware due in large part to its decentralized inventory system. Today’s follow-up audit found that those failures have continued.

Currently, more than 2,000 individual “site administrators” across the school system are responsible for maintaining and updating their own computer inventories, which are never reconciled with the DOE’s central purchasing database or its Asset Management System (AMS). As a result, the DOE has no way of knowing whether all of the items it purchased are properly accounted for at school locations. These systemic failures expose the City to an increased risk of waste, fraud, and abuse.

In the earlier audit, the Comptroller recommended the DOE establish a centralized inventory system — possibly through the existing AMS database, which already contains information on hardware purchased by the DOE. Today’s follow-up audit showed the results of DOE’s rejection of that and other recommendations — still more missing and unused equipment — and revealed that the DOE had not even tried to find 1,090 of the 1,817 computers that were identified as missing in the December 2014 audit.

Findings from the follow-up audit include:

The DOE’s records remain inaccurate and incomplete

The DOE failed to properly account for 4,993 of its 14,329 pieces of computer hardware — or 34.9 percent of the total — at the nine sampled sites. Of those 4,993 items:

• Auditors looked for — but DOE was unable to produce — 1,816 pieces of computer hardware during physical inspections; and
• Auditors found that 3,541 pieces of computer hardware were not listed in the locations’ inventory records.

No centralized system for monitoring inventory

The previous audit recommended that the DOE revise its Standard Operating Procedures to record all computer hardware purchases in AMS and ensure that annual inventory counts are conducted and reconciled with the information in AMS. Yet, the DOE continues to refuse to implement that recommendation, citing costs, despite the potential for fraud and wasteful spending.

The DOE did not monitor recordkeeping procedures at schools and administrative sites

DOE fails to ensure that its inventory records are accurate and complete. The Department’s unmonitored, decentralized inventory system — in which site administrators from each of DOE’s 2,278 sites are responsible for maintaining and updating inventory records — are never checked against central databases of purchases. This puts computer hardware at a higher risk of being lost, stolen, and wasted.

The DOE accounted for only 12.9% of the items that were previously identified as missing

In today’s audit, the DOE accounted for only 234 of the 1,817 missing pieces of computer hardware identified in the previous audit — or 12.9 percent. The findings are broken down below.

• The DOE reported that it did not attempt to locate 1,090 computer items, most of which were listed in AMS as “location unknown.”
• Of the remaining 727 pieces of missing hardware identified in the 2014 audit, the DOE reported that it had located 353 items at eight sites.
• However, when the Comptroller’s office attempted to inspect 188 of those items at two of the sites, DOE could account for only 69 of them, or 36.7 percent.
  • The DOE claimed it had identified 162 of the missing items at the sampled DOE administrative office, but when auditors visited, they only found 69 of them.
  • Although the DOE claimed that 26 pieces of computer hardware were located at a single school, the DOE did not provide the auditors with access to that school to verify their claims.

The DOE did not provide schools and other decentralized sites with sufficient guidance and support to ensure compliance with its inventory guidelines

During interviews with DOE staff at nine sampled sites, auditors were told that they were not aware of — and did not receive access to — inventory training, AMS data, and other vendor inventory services, all of which should have been in place to help properly track computer equipment.

To address the issues that were identified in the earlier audit and the persistent problems uncovered in the follow-up audit, the Comptroller’s office issued 19 recommendations, emphasizing the need for the DOE to establish a single centralized system for monitoring its hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of  computer hardware.

New York Schools Faulted Again for Failing to Keep Track of Computers

By KATE TAYLORJULY 19, 2017, NY TIMES

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

• Share
• Tweet
• Email
• More

Three years ago, an audit by the New York City comptroller’s office found that because of “grossly inaccurate” record-keeping, the city’s Education Department could not account for 1,817 computers it owned.

On Wednesday, Scott M. Stringer, the comptroller, issued a follow-up audit and said things had not improved. Mr. Stringer rebuked the department for its “ineptitude” in keeping track of computers and tablets it had bought for schools and offices.

The recommendations the comptroller’s office made in 2014 included creating a centralized inventory system for computers and tablets and routinely monitoring record-keeping procedures at schools and department offices to ensure that their inventories were accurate. Neither recommendation was adopted. The department said maintaining a centralized inventory was not practical.

For the latest audit, the comptroller’s office examined the computer inventory at eight schools and one administrative office. The comptroller’s office found that 4,993 out of 14,329 pieces of computer hardware at those locations were not properly accounted for, and that 1,816 pieces were not found by the auditors at all. At Fort Hamilton High School in Brooklyn, for example, more than one in five pieces of computer hardware listed in purchasing records, school inventory records and other city documents were not physically accounted for.

As for the 1,817 computers that were unaccounted for in the earlier audit, the comptroller’s office said the department had accounted for 234, or 13 percent.

“We constantly hear the same excuses from the agency — that monitoring is in place, that systems are functioning the way they should and that the public should trust that everything is fine,” Mr. Stringer said in a statement. “As this audit once again shows, taxpayer dollars are exposed to waste, fraud or abuse — and it’s coming at our kids’ expense.”

The Education Department criticized the new audit, saying its findings were “fundamentally flawed and unreliable.” The department faulted the comptroller’s office for relying on the department’s Asset Management System, which is primarily used to track hardware warranty and service data, as a central inventory of hardware that had been bought.

The comptroller’s office noted that the department had instructed schools to use data from the Asset Management System as a basis for creating and updating their own inventory records.

The new audit covered the two years from July 1, 2014, to June 30, 2016. The department bought more than $200 million worth of computers and tablets during that period.

Nearly 2,000 technology devices for students are missing

Whistleblower Rafe Esquith Can Move Forward With His Lawsuit

Congratulations, Rafe, for keeping the fight going!
See also:

Rafe Esquith, Teacher Now Re-assigned in Los Angeles, Moves a Nation To Ask, "What Are We Doing To Our Teachers"?

Betsy Combier
 betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Fired LAUSD teacher can sue district for alleged discrimination, court says

By City News Service

POSTED: 07/20/17, 3:40 PM 

Rafe Esquith

LOS ANGELES >> A state appellate court panel Thursday upheld a trial judge’s ruling that a former Los Angeles Unified School District teacher can move forward with his lawsuit alleging he was removed from his classroom for criticizing many of the school district’s policies and initiatives.

The three-justice panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal found that Rafe Esquith’s causes of action did not arise out of an employment investigation conducted against him and that therefore the district was not engaged in “protected activity,” which would have been grounds for dismissing the case.

“We agree that Esquith’s claims do not arise from a protected employment investigation,” Justice Audrey Collins wrote. “Rather, Esquith has alleged that defendants harassed him, discriminated against him, and retaliated against him, and to accomplish these ends they engaged in a baseless investigation and took adverse employment actions against Esquith.”

Zack Muljat, one of Esquith’s attorneys, issued a statement on the ruling.

“We agreed with the ruling in the trial court and we agree with the opinion of the Court of Appeal,” Muljat said. “We look forward to the opportunity to forge ahead and bring justice to Mr. Esquith.”

In his July 2016 ruling, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mark Mooney said he could not grant the district’s motion to dismiss Esquith’s entire complaint because some of his claims did not fall under what is considered protected speech and the right of the LAUSD to conduct an investigation of the teacher.

Mooney’s ruling meant that Esquith’s claims of defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, the taking of items from his classroom, retaliation, age discrimination and unfair business practices remained in the case. He also is seeking reinstatement to his teaching position.

“Esquith alleged that he was an outspoken critic of certain LAUSD policies and he was nearing retirement, and as a result (the district) retaliated and discriminated against him by removing him from his teaching position and conducting a baseless, meandering investigation designed to damage Esquith’s career and reputation,” Collins wrote.

Esquith, 63, was removed from his Hobart Elementary School classroom in April 2015. The district began investigating him when another teacher came forward to allege that Esquith was using inappropriate sexual language with his students.

Esquith is known for introducing Shakespeare to his pupils.

“I have received international recognition as an innovative and groundbreaking educator,” Esquith says in a sworn declaration. “Additionally, I am a New York Times bestselling author of books addressing my teaching and educational philosophy.”

Esquith says he never received a complaint from a parent or teacher during his 30 years as an educator.

Esquith also maintains that he has “suffered at the hands of (the LAUSD) for criticizing their wasteful practices, collusion with private business interests and lack of concern for student development.”

As a result, Esquith claims, the district has “attempted to silence me through a campaign of retaliation.”

Elsa Cruz, one of Esquith’s former students, denied in her own sworn statement that he ever sent her any inappropriate emails as alleged in the LAUSD’s statement of charges against him.

“The communications described in the statement of charges between Mr. Esquith and myself are small pieces of much larger conversations that are taken wholly out of context,” she said, adding that she believes the district “cherry-picked” portions of the emails to make it appear the entire conversations were sexual in nature.

The district fired Esquith in October 2015, two months after he sued.